"I stay low wit dees fookers" oh man, classic!

@deboshadow

2 ай бұрын

Man is cautious for a reason. Got to respect him.

New revolver knowledge. They had different front sight posts for one handed shooting. 😲 I had no idea, or even thought about that before this vid. 😅

Loving Budi! More Budi! I'd also like to hear you and Budi discuss the history of these old revolvers too. I know I could go to Ian and get the real low down, but surely the two of you have your own views.

@robertsears8323

2 ай бұрын

No more Budi. Just NO.

The other thing about the half moon front sights regarding POA/POI is that off a covered firing line, the top of the sight reflects light and your eye focuses on the darker portion slightly lower down, which causes you to move the front sight a little higher up in the rear sight notch, pushing your POI up. I always find those half moon sight smiths to hit high for me as a result since I'm not usually under a covered line and usually do a 6 or sub 6 o clock hold with them so the bright top portion of the sight gets washed out against the white of the target. Probably less of an issue against a dark target.

I think it's hilarious that the French Mle 1892 is a more advanced design than the Nagant M1895. Sure, the 1892 has a basically pointless Abedie action, but the 1895 has that godawful gas-seal camming cylinder. At least the Abedie action doesn't bugger up the trigger pull beyond all salvation. I got a chance to fire a Soviet production M1895 a few years ago. My immediate thought was that we should put it in a pretty, wood-framed display case in our Firearms office, to be brought out whenever someone complained about the terrible trigger on our then-issue pistol, to show them just how lucky they were.

This was a great series. Budi is a great cohost as well.

@robertsears8323

2 ай бұрын

If you think he is ok?

@myparceltape1169

2 ай бұрын

​@@robertsears8323Budi is good.

Cool old guns, guys. Thanks, Budi and Mike! I love these old antique revolvers.

Great job, you two! It must've been quite a change when the Swiss started issuing the Luger in 7.65mm Parabellum, after the revolver and it's low-powered load.

Props to you both for making this. I also have weird tastes in past military firearms and as always, it is generally good to be living in "the future" - so content like this is always fascinating to me. 👍

Thank you gentlemen for an excellent two part video.

We need more of u two in videos brilliant

I own some "Crappy" revolvers, too! A cranky pinfire here, an old Iver Johnson there,....making old guns function makes the world go round.❤

These two vids where fantastic and Budi is awesome thanks fot the amazing work.

Always enjoy your videos, Mike! As a Yank, your Brit take on revolvers is ...entertaining? Still, enjoy the work you and Chap put out, its fun seeing the European take on stuff that's quite different from the American.. Thank you!

The S&W Hand Ejector might benefit from a Tyler "T" Grip. They were very popular with post war Texas Ranger types. Its not a permanent alteration either they just slip under the grip panels. 8:05

Mike and Budi have some great banter!!! Keep up the good work guys and we’ll all keep watching!!!

I agree that french 1892 ammo could use more pep. Considering Fiocchi loads them to put out 192 foot pounds with 110 grains at 880 fps and there haven't been any reports of these firearms blowing up from overpressure from that ammo I would say they are quite capable revolvers.

@thebotrchap

2 ай бұрын

There’s certainly enough meat on the cylinder and frame for a punchier load. Careful with Fiocchi, I had two in a box what didn’t leave the barrel. Luckily I noticed 😮‍💨 I have a few original rounds, perhaps I should load the powder and bullets into new cases to see how they shoot.

As an academic exercise, consider the following. You are a late 19th century country. When purchasing firearms for the government there are two scenarios to consider. 1. You are a country with few international assets or commitments and need or have an army as a deterrent. But, you do not anticipate a war anytime soon and your budget is small. So, your forces can/must be small, well-trained, professional units that, should the need arise, can serve as a command and training core for a larger force of drafted troops. In this case, you want well-made firearms that will last several decades in service. So, for a pistol, you need something that can serve as a primary arm for the calvary to use in a charge and a side arm for officers and some other troops. You purchase a revolver of smaller caliber (cheaper bulk ammo and less wear/strain on you weapon) with a strong frame. Such as the Smith and Wesson. 2. You are a country with large international assets and commitments and need or have an army that must protect those assets and honor those commitments. In this case, you realize the firearms you obtain will be used, worn out, lost; or destroyed faster. The stronger, longer lasting frame is no longer a primary concern; Reliability, effectiveness, and speed of manufacture, repair, and use are a greater concern. So you choose the Webly in a more powerful caliber.

The Smith and Wesson lock work may look thin but it has an outstanding combat record for over 100 years. The grips were easily replaced/supplemented with a great variety of available grips, grip adaptors, etc. The long barrel maximized velocity and sight radius at the expense of carrying ease but was in the tradition of the Colt SAA. The US Army used the N Frame Smith revolver (and the = Colt, an even bigger gun) to back fill the shortage of 1911 45 acps in WW1. In WW2 they used the smaller frame and 4" K frame Smith and = Colts. I love all of these old revolvers and thank you very much for this demonstration and honest banter!

@zoiders

2 ай бұрын

The 1917 spec S&W and Colt revolvers were respectively the S&W Hand Ejector chambered in .45 ACP and the Colt New Service. The "N" frames like the Model 29 were yet to exist. The 1917 in .45ACP was returned to service in WW2. They US did issue .38 revolvers in the shape of the S&W Military & Police and the Colt Official Police. The S&W M&P however was yet to gain the "K" designation until it became the later Model 10. The "N" frame S&W didn't really exist until 1957 either.

@arnoldcohen1250

2 ай бұрын

@@zoiders Exactly right. I used those terms for the readers not familiar with the fine points of Colt and Smith and Wesson classification to understand the relative sizes under discussion using current names. There were differences between the large frame Smiths and Colts. For example, the slightly larger Colt required 1/2 or full moon clips (or the cartridges would fall through) while the Smith would load and fire without them, just requiring the spent cartridges to be poked out. The Colt OP was built on the old 41 frame while the Smith Military and Police evolved from 38 S&W ("short") 6 shot frame. In the end, in WW! the larger frame revolvers were used, in WW2 old large frame stock in 45 cal. was issued but the newly issued were on the smaller frames for both manufacturers in 38 caliber.

@zoiders

2 ай бұрын

​​​​@@arnoldcohen1250It was only the very few first Colt 1917s that required a moon clip to headspace the round. The US Government had nationalised S&W for the duration of the war. They took the S&W 1917 cylinder design that head spaced on the mouth of the cartridge and handed that patented feature over to Colt for free. So nearly all Colt 1917s will still fire without moon clips. 38 special was not in the supply chain for the US Army or Marines, when new production sidearms were required for the army and marines they simply issued M1 Carbines instead. They only issued. 45ACP pistols or revolvers. Of the .38 revolvers made in the US the majority went to security guards at strategic facilities in the US, naval aviators or air force aviators. A large number in .38 SAA were supplied to UK and Commonwealth forces rather than American ones. 8:26

@arnoldcohen1250

2 ай бұрын

@@zoiders That is good to know. Mine requires the clips, so it must be an early one. I need to check its serial number for dating. Interesting that S&W was nationalized. Woodrow Wilson nationalized many industries during WW1 so I should not be surprised by that.

@zoiders

Ай бұрын

​@@arnoldcohen1250The simple way to check is to see what happens when you load it without a half moon.

Nice. Time for the double feature.

Thank you fine Sirs

Nice. Just got back from the range with two of my revolvers: a 1920-ish S&W Hand Ejector/M&P and a Ruger SP-101. Not the best range day ever, but better than work.

Thank you Budi for torturing The Bloke with these wonderful old gats!

Fun video. It would be nice to have some graphics to identify each revolver. Also, can you post something about the loads you are using for each gun? Thanks.

You're missing the teapot grip shooting position. Wasn't that the style of the time?

@17:15 - Ohw, ohw, Den Hààg, mauhje stad, achtuh de duinèh 😂😂 Classic Harrie Jekkers 🔝💯 So you lived in our beautiful country too then, @Bloke? Your pronunciation isn't at all bad, kudos to you.

Awesome video. Tks guys.

Thanks guys, we all see things differently

You know things get serious when Bloke starts speaking Dutch. Are you and Chap participating in the Remote Military March this year?

@thebotrchap

2 ай бұрын

Yessir

Thank you both for this excellent presentation including part one of course. A nice surprise having some dutch history in it too. Mooi commentaar daarbij ook.

Besides the N1895 i shot non of those in the lineup but it is interesting to see how you experience the grip and hold in combination of the recoil. I now want to do something like this myself.

Revolver esoteria. Yay!

Aloha; well done gentlemen! Mahalo

Don't you just love those attempts at dutch. Now i want him to live in Belgium for a few months and see what kind of dutch accent he gets from that experience.

@BlokeontheRange

2 ай бұрын

I used to speak Dutch fluently, with a Zuid Hollands accent. When I went to Belgium they'd reply in dialect rather than standard Flemish, so they treated me the exact same as the Dutch, lol...

Nice facility

Low pressure handloads and metal jacketed bullets is just asking for a bullet lodged in the barrel. Doesn't surprize me in the least that the Smith shot very well. The Nagant did very well.

S&W is the best design, MkVI the best combat revolver. If you hate the checkered commercial grip you would really hate the smooth ones used on US WW1 M1917 version.

The S&W is fortunately fixed very easily with a set of Pachmyer stocks for less than $30. US...

So if you was in the armed forces of old, and was an officer, and was / is part of the dress code to have a pistol, you'd have a rough selection of crap to hand over when surrendering then😅

OK, revolvers aren't my thing but I noticed that the "teapot" revolver (at about the 20 minute mark) rose up in Mike's hand every time he fired it using his non-teapot grip, which may have had an effect on his accuracy.

A true crap shoot, great content much appreciated.

A Brit who can't "teapot"? Unheard of!

For all the slack you gave to the Rast & Gasser's grip, does it not allow for the most linear trigger pull out of these revolvers, making it theoretically easier to not pull the muzzle up or down, especially in DA?

@BlokeontheRange

2 ай бұрын

No, it's really terrible.

@the-hey-maker

2 ай бұрын

@@BlokeontheRange @BlokeontheRange I understand you. However, this is peculiar to me. Your and Budi's scolding review of this revolver is the only negative one that I have ever come across. In his review 10 years ago Ian did not seem to dislike this gun's ergonomics in any significant way, even saying that the Rast & Gasser has a decent target pistol grip. And in the C&Rsenal's episode on this handgun Mae seemed quite comfortable firing it too, only saying that she would have liked a greater flare at the bottom of the grip. She shot this gun Ok too, mostly in DA and one-handed. The crew even shot some high-speed footage of a trigger pull, which is quite linear if you get an old-fashioned low hold of the grip. Sure, maybe since then either Ian or Mae (or both of them) changed their mind on the gun, but I doubt it. It would be cool to get their current opinion on shooting it. This should not be surprising: any given gun can be very comfy for one person and horrible for another, that's to be expected. But the fact that you and Budi have come together in your mutual hate for how this gun doesn't fit you whilst our american friends seem to be just fine with its ergonomics - somehow it struck me as quite a peculiar contrast.

So Bloke would you say that allegedly the Russian Nagant revolver ended more conscripts than enemy soldiers due to it being a near useless combat sidearm?.

@BlokeontheRange

2 ай бұрын

I think that's not impossible... Certainly if you factor in GULAG/executions...

Compared to the Schofield and SAA, European revolvers of the 19th century just look off to me

Toch raar om zo maar in eens behoorlijk goed Nederlands te horen. 👍😂

Oi, stop with them negativ waves towards the Nagat! Remember the title of the video? By that definition the Nagat ranks top.

The best pistol out of the era was the one Samual Colt had so much trouble getting Europe to buy. SAA

7 inches might seem long to a European, but we Americans have much longer ones.

The guy in the chair needs to learn how to reload before he hurts himself.

Rubbish comment for rubbish pistols!